FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 

Dual Sequantizer Patch from plord
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Wiard  
Author Dual Sequantizer Patch from plord
Muff Wiggler
I saw Paul post this over at, and I wanted to repost it Wiard system will be arriving within a couple of months and every day I'm looking at the manuals, and wrapping my head around Wiard concepts...

this one hadn't occured to me and has me thinking about some different ways of using the Sequantizer than I had before. I wanted to put the patch in here so it'll be easy to find once my system arrives, and also to maybe have some more Sequantizer discussion.

Paul, thanks for posting this - really cool patch! And I hope you don't mind me starting a thread here about it. If it's a problem just let me know and I'll pull it.

plord wrote:
Let's say you have two Sequantizers. Tune them to the same scale. Clock them at different but related rates, and send some other source of voltage to the Select input-- S/H, or two triangle waves with the same period but different phase, or the positive and negative output from a Binary Zone, or even cross modulate them with each other (use the quantized outputs to drive two oscillators, and use the 10V outputs to patch the opposing Sequantizer stage Select input...and remember they're clocked at different rates).

Now you have a two voice harmony that can be as random or repeatable as the voltages you send to the Select input. Set the sequence that runs faster to your lead voice; set the sequence clocked at, say, 8x the lead timing to a bass voice, maybe as a drone, maybe gating it with an envelope into two 4 step notes, whatever. Or gate both voices separately, whatever.

In my experience, this kind of setup is more musical than merely taking two S/H voltage sources and quantizing them to the same scale. Maybe that's because I'm all OCD about setting up the voltage inputs and my application of this theory isn't all that random at all smile but it still takes me down a melodic path that I wouldn't traverse on my own.
the sequantizer fuckin rules! it's responsible for a nice portion of our 606 Boogie jam.
Muff Wiggler
i still can't freakin' believe i've paid for a Wiard system and it's being built

somebody pinch me
No prob on the repost. and if you haven't pulled down the tips list from the files section of the Yahoo Wiard list, go do that. It's packed with Sequantizer info, some of which is still obscure to me.
Muff Wiggler
sweet, thanks very very much Paul, really appreciate it!!

I did get that text file, it's one of the things I pour over as part of wrapping my head around the Wiard. It's insane the possibilities in that system. I didn't feel like it was OK to post that here, it contains the work of so many people and it's got a good home on the Wiard group.

cebec also sent me a text file he put together of various stuff that's been posted to the Wiard list.... some slight crossover between that and the Wiard patch text file, but a lot of unique stuff as well. Again mostly work from a variety of people (mostly Grant's words in that one though) so I don't think it's in good faith to repost it, but damn there is so much good stuff in that Wiard group

thanks again Paul 8)
plord wrote:
No prob on the repost. and if you haven't pulled down the tips list from the files section of the Yahoo Wiard list, go do that. It's packed with Sequantizer info, some of which is still obscure to me.

oh man. i missed that. i'm going to go leech it right now! hyper
Muff Wiggler
i find that posting that stuff here can be a tough moral judgement call. as mentioned above i think it's in bad faith to just take content from the Wiard group to repost it here. On the other hand of course it's great to have info here and it's prompts attention to the instrument and hopefully some discussion.

It's one of those fuzzy moral lines, and I hope we can have a balance between useful information and discussion, without seeming arrogant or simply reposting other's works (which I don't feel very good about).

With something like that patch text file, my feeling is sort of like this - if someone here wants to discuss a specific patch and what is happening with the modules, ideas it has given them etc., I think it's ok as there is new thought and content being generated. As long as one is clear that "I found this patch on the Wiard group, it was submitted by So-and-so, and it gave me this idea.....", I feel it's OK.

On the other hand, simply reposting the big compliation patch list that's also posted there, that's where it sorta (in my mind) crosses the line into bad faith.

So I think as long as we keep this in mind, and are thankful, respectful and recognizing of our sources, AND are generating new discussion, it's OK.

But, this is just my personal feeling on a fuzzy issue. If I hear from someone like Grant or the originator of a patch that they aren't pleased with having a discussion on their work carry over to here, I'll gladly pull threads or posts, no problem. It's not my intent to upset anyone, but of course I do like to see conversation and thought around these things flourish.

I'm not too worried, we are a pretty reasonable and understanding crew around here.
plus anyone who's truly down with Wiard should join the yahoo group anyways. it's such a great group and i enjoy the list emails. lots of mp3's on there too!
I tried in my file to preserve attribution without giving spammers cleartext email addresses. Those seem like reasonable guidelines in addition to what has been expressed above.
Muff Wiggler
i think that's a different case that doesn't warrant so much moral concern - you culled a bunch of tips from the Wiard list, organized them into a super handy file - and then posted that to the Wiard list. Totally good and helpful, no moral grey area there in my opinion.

It's the transfer of work done for one site/group over to another that raises the question for me anyway.

In other words, for example: "That jackass Muff Wiggler is trying to get people to his website by stealing stuff that other people did on their own websites"

that's not a cool thing in my opinion and should be avoided. There's merit in original thought and conversation, not so much in blind reposting.

Anyway beating this to death but that's why I wanted to make sure it was cool with you Paul

thanks again 8)
No problem smile

SO to get back on topic! I posted a followup over on modularsynth pointing out that you could pull off a similar trick with two miniwaves and some slightly more creative patching.

What other modules can do this? and is the result different, better, worse than quantizing two random voltages? Discuss...
i'm still learning and lack experience but to me for modulars in general, i'd say the less modules and patch chords used the better unless of course each method provides a uniqueness of some sort that's desirable.

there's a lot of ground to cover and while one method may not be as efficient it may lead to a whole other territory while still covering similar ground.

plus i just don't have enough modules. i hate tying up my modules for drums and then having way less options for the accompanying melody, noise, what have you but once my system grows so will the capabilities and then it'll just be about variety.

for instance once i have the 8008 i probably won't patch up kicks as much but there will still definately be times where i'll want a different sound the 8008 won't be capable of. even if it's only subtle. it's all based around mood for me.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Wiard  
Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group